Monday, 24 October 2011

In this entry, comparison will be made on the prohibition of alcohol in Islam and the west.

Most muslims understand the word 'jahilliyah' as the period of ignorance
in Arabia before the coming of the Prophet salallahualaihiwassalam.
During this period, the arabs of Makkah are involved in a lot of
activities where we would say are backwards, disgusting and immoral.

In this period of ignorance (jahilliyah) also refers to individual
education. Most of them were illiterate, barely have any understanding
of science and basically no system in life. One thing for sure is that,
the arabs during jahilliyah heavily rely on alcohol as part of their
lives. They had about 250 names for alcohol which shows their obsession
for alcohol. Having 250 names for a type of drink is exceptional for any
culture.

The came of Islam brought changes to this jahilliyah or backward
culture. The changes are in the sequence manner. First they asked
Prophet Muhammad salallahualaihiwasalam for guidance on liquor. "They
ask you about strong drinks and games of chance. Say :"in both is great
evil, even though there is some benefit for people, but their evil is
greater than their benefit." They ask: "What shall we spend in the Way
of Allah?" Say :"Whatever you can spare." In this way Allah clearly
expounds His injunctions to you that you may reflect upon them." (Surah
albaqarah verse 219) Then, as they were difficult to part with alcohol,
some offer their solah while intoxicated hence making errors in Qur'anic
recitation. Then the verse was revealed"O you who believe! Do not draw
near to the prayer while you are intoxicated until you know what you
are saying; nor when you are defiled..." (Surah nisa verse 43) Liquor
still showed its harm as people fight with each other and etc hence the
following verse was revealed."O you who believe! Strong drink and game
of chance and idols and divining arrows are only an infamy of Satan's
handiwork. Leave it aside in order that you may succeed." (Surah al
maidah verse 90)

After receiving this clear instruction from Allah, the arabs of
jahilliyah who were so attached to alcohol part their ways with alcohol.
Until today, muslims still stay away from alcohol. Of course there are
some of those black sheeps, but generally muslims avoid alcohol. The
punishment for a muslim to be caught drinking alcohol was 80 lashes.
Even without the practise of this punishment, muslims generally manage to keep a distance from
alcohol.

In the U.S around 1930's they tried to banned liquor. They spend about
600 million dollars for campaign and all the expenses to prohibit
alcohol. Even with most of its population who are literate and generally
have good knowledge of science, the prohibition of alcohol didn't last
long. In the end, the community caused the prohibition to be taken off.
The law of prohibition of alcohol in this context was created by human.
The rationale of the law comes from the will of the people. Therefore if
people do not will such prohibition, it will then be lifted or taken
off. This shows the weakness of the so called "democracy" - the voice of
majority. The voice of majority doesn't necessarily proves that it is
the correct guidance/path. Hence if the voice of majority is being
followed, the minority will then suffer. The rationale of the law also
comes from the feelings and influence of what the majority receive.
Creating a law following instinct or feelings can cause a great error in
our lives. Hence we actually need a law that does not originate from
human.

Islam managed to prohibit alcohol without even spending one penny/cent
for campaigns and etc. It is done through iman and fear of Allah. This
is the strength and benefits of Islam that victory can be obtained
through iman. Usually the west is being labelled more advance compared
to the muslim countries. Despite their "advance" they could not achieve
what the muslims did and it lasted for more than 1400 years. I'm of the
opinion that Islam is more advance because it takes into consideration
of the next life or the life in hereafter. The west only 'advances' in
this life in the world and do not have a clue or preparation for the
life of the hereafter.

Sunday, 2 October 2011

Narrated Anas bin Malik radiallahuanhu: The Prophet salallahualaihiwasalam said, "None will have the sweetness(delight) of Faith

(a) till he loves a person and loves him only for Allah's sake,
(b) till it becomes dearer to him to be thrown in the fire than to
revert to disbelief (Heathenism) after Allah has brought him out (saved
him) from it,
(c) till Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad salallahualaihiwasalam) become dearer to him than anything else."

Narrated Tariq: 'Abdullah said, "The best talk is Allah's Book (the
Qur'an), and the best guidance is the guidance of Muhammad
salallahualaihiwasalam.

They started the "article by saying are our politicians bad, crazy or
stupid?" Does this not show you that they lack of good manners and
respect to those who are seeking ways to improve the country (i.e
politicans, governers)? They can argue with the politicians but calling
them bad, crazy or stupid are not from the teaching of Islam.Narrated Abu Hurairah radiallahuanhu: The Prophet salallahualaihiwasalam
said, "A good, pleasent, friendly word is a Sadaqa." [Sahih Bukhari]

The continued by saying "if I were the opposition, I would jump and
present my party". This already shows that they are trying to divide the
community. Show link. Also the title 'No hudud please, we're Malaysian' stresses on nationalism/tribalism."And be not as those who divided and
differed among themselves after the clear proofs had come to them. It is
they for whom there is an awful torment." (surah al-an'am verse 35)Nationalism is HARAM because the
Prophet Mohammad (saw) said in the following Hadeeths:"Leave it. It is Rotten " [Bukhari &
Muslim] refers
to all forms of Asabiyah, nationalism, racism, and patriotism. Grouping the Muslims on tribalistic lines
is clearly forbidden. It is narrated by Abu Daud that the Messenger of Allah
(saw) said, "He is not one us who calls for `Asabiyah,
(nationalism/tribalism) or who fights for `Asabiyah or who dies for `Asabiyah."" ...People should give up their
pride in nations because this is a coal from the coals of hell-fire. If
they do not give this up Allah (swt) will consider them lower than a lowly
worm which pushes itself through khur (feces)." [abu Dawd and Tirmidhi].

"An offer of the hudud law and its grim serving of chopped-off Muslim
hands and feet, and stoning to death! What kind of future is that?" This
clearly indicates that their definition of future is only in the
lifetime of this world. They are entirely worried of what is going to
happen to "Malaysia" in the future but not considering about the Muslims
in the hereafter. Muslims should believe that future also means in the
hereafter.

"So it's okay for Muslims to be brutalised?" There should be no police
or jail if they put it in that sense if they are scared to be
brutalised. Nobody should go to jail because that person is being
brutalised and deprived from the main society. The idea of jail is to
make people fear of it so that nobody would dare to make any evil. If
anyone decides to do evil, they would be punished to prison, life
sentence and etc. Similarly with hudud law, it is to create the fear and
reminder that there is even a worse punishment in the hereafter. I can
point out that by doing hudud, the taxpayers money will be saved to pay
the food and accommodation of the prisoners. Plus, those who committed
evil acts are not likely to commit again.

"What if the thief was a Chinese or Indian ...while the Malay is now
disabled.." The issue here is about Muslims and their law, why write
Chinese, Indian and Malay? This MAY BE because they are trying to
strike racial issues. Clearly we have chinese muslims, malay christians
and etc. There is no need to include race in this issue/article. This
article is either trying to provoke or just simply bad composition.
Hence, clearly there is no conspiracy to make the MALAYS permanently
disabled. The hudud law is made to encourage MUSLIMS to do good and
avoid commiting evil.

"But they are Malaysian citizens who have every rights to speak up on
laws that allow for brutal and inhumane punishments against their fellow
citizens, the majority population boot." This clearly shows that we do
not have personal rights to practise our religion! Clearly they do not
receive the knowledge in the Qur'an or the pious Muslims about Prophet
Noah. If it was clearly up to the majority, they would be afflicted by
destruction. Muslims believes in the law that was prescribed, by
following the majority will not let us practice it!

"Who wants to live in such society when your neighbour, ... are subject
to a cruel legal system?" Another question can be raised from this is
that who wants a neighbour who is a criminal and is not afraid to commit
evil? Narrated Ibn Umar
radiallahuanhu Allah's Mesengger salallahu alaihiwasalam said, "Jibril
kept on recommending me about treating the neighbours kindly and
politely, so much so I thought that he would order me to make them as my
heirs." [Sahih Bukhari]

Narrated Abu Shuraih: The Prophet salallahualaiwasalam said, "By Allah,
he does not believe! By Allah, he does not believe! By Allah, he does
not believe! It was said, "Who is that, O Allah's Messenger?" He said,
"That person whose neighbour does not feel safe from evil." [Sahih
bukhari]

They have mistaken rape for zina. Clearly rape is different from zina.
Zina is consensual but was witnessed/caught by some. Rape is
non-consensual.

During the time of the Prophet (saw) punishment was inflicted on
the rapist on the solitary evidence of the woman who was raped by
him. Wa'il ibn Hujr reports of an incident when a woman was raped.
Later, when some people came by, she identified and accused the
man of raping her. They seized him and brought him to Allah's messenger,
who said to the woman, "Go away, for Allâh has forgiven
you," but of the man who had raped her, he said, "Stone
him to death." (Tirmidhi and Abu Dawud)

During the time when Umar (raa) was the Khalifah, a woman accused
his son Abu Shahmah of raping her; she brought the infant borne
of this incident with her to the mosque and publicly spoke about
what had happened. Umar (raa) asked his son who acknowledged committing
the crime and was duly punished right there and then. There was
no punishment given to the woman. (Rauf)

Islamic legal scholars interpret rape as a crime in the category
of Hiraba. In ‘Fiqh-us-Sunnah’, hiraba is described
as: ‘a single person or group of people causing public disruption,
killing, forcibly taking property or money, attacking or raping
women (hatk al ‘arad), killing cattle, or disrupting agriculture.’[Can be found at http://www.muslimaccess.com/articles/Women/rape_in_islam.asp]

Clearly this Hudud law have caused fear in their hearts. Hence it shows
how effective the Hudud law because it managed to cause fear and may
Allah make us righteous muslims so that we are avoided from the
punishment in this world and the hereafter.